Tapering & Peaking: How To Design A Taper and Peak For Sports Performance [Part 2 of Peaking Series]

Read Part 1 Here

In order to see results and reap in the adaptations from exercise and training, an athlete or trainee must push their bodies past baseline, past their current limits. To maximize these gains, an athlete must also properly recover from training sessions so they can continue to train in a safe and efficient manner. Aside from adequate sleep, proper nutrition and nutrient intakes, one way athletes recover is by implementing periods of restoration, often called a deload. A deload is when the training stress is reduced in order for the athlete to realize their adaptations and to give their mind and body a well-deserved rest. A similar protocol, called a taper or peak, is when training stressed is acutely withdrawn to improve an athlete's performance measures beyond baseline, usually to prepare for an important sporting event or competition.

Part 2 will cover the details of a proper taper/peaking protocol. The manipulation of training variables will be discussed as well as the performance improvements that are expected from a taper.

---

Tapering & Peaking

Tapering and peaking for a competition revolves around the concepts of functional-overreaching and supercompensation. From part 1, we learned that acute fatigue from training can accumulate over weeks and months to cause chronic fatigue. Chronic fatigue can be be categorized into non-functional (develops into overtraining syndrome) and functional.

Functional-overreaching, despite it's negative effects on performance can result in what's known as supercompensation. Supercompensation, a slight enhancement of performance (>100%), is achieved through proper recovery after a subsequent period of hard training, termed planned overreaching, taper, or peaking. For the sake of this article, I'll be using the terms taper and peak synonymously.

Taken off Wikipedia.

A taper usually involves a structured reduction in training load to remove acute and fatigue in order to potentiate increases in physiological and psychological performance. I touched on this subject in my periodization series, where I discussed the fitness-fatigue model of performance, which suggests that fitness and fatigue are inversely related. When we introduce a training stress, fitness adaptations and the accumulation of fatigue occur simultaneously and it is not until the training stressor is reduced, where we see an improvement in performance. The fitness-fatigue model is used in conjunction with Selye's General Adaptation Syndrome and the Stimulus-Fatigue-Recovery-Adaptation model to explain training. I highly recommend you read my periodization series to better understand the following sections.

---

Who Should Taper? and Why?

The concept of tapering was created in order for athletes to produce their best performance on a given competition date. This means the taper or peak will be the most suitable for athletes involved in sports that are climatic in nature. Think of a huge MMA fight or the Olympic 100m sprint. Events that boil down to one time and date where the athlete needs to perform at their absolute best. These athletes will utilize the most aggressive tapering methods, compared to team sports or sports that consist of longer in-seasons where athletes are required to maintain a relatively high performance throughout weeks or months.

Non-climatic sports like tennis, basketball, and many team sports that have a 4-5 month game season will not depend on tapering/peaking methods until the most important games and matches - tournaments, playoffs and championships.

However, both type of sports use the same principle of training residuals to guide their tapering methods. 

Taken from Nick Winkleman

Training residuals refer to the rate of detraining for each physical attribute, such as maximal strength, maximal power, endurance, etc. This is an important concept to understand as there must be a fine balance between the how much a stressor should be withdrawn (and for how long) and what qualities must be at peak condition come competition day.

---

manipulating Training variables

Since frequency, intensity and volume mediate training load and training stress, manipulation of any these variables can cause a reduction in training load, the main goal of a taper. However, decreases in the wrong variable can hinder performance.

Frequency

In a study by Mjukia et al (2012), elite middle-distance runners saw improvements in their performance when their frequency of training was maintained during a taper, compared to a 30% reduction in training frequency which resulted in no change in performance. The possible benefits of maintaining frequency can be credited to the fact that higher frequency training allows for a more strategic distribution of volume load, and creates an environment where technical skill can be practiced more frequently leading up to a competition. Due to the limitations and lack of studies on the manipulation of frequency for tapering, these recommendations seem to hold true for both aerobic and anaerobic sports. Example: take an Olympic Weightlifter who snatches and clean & jerks 4 times a week. It would not make sense to reduce competition lift frequency as the competition nears as maintaining 4 times a week practice is crucial for skill practice and visualization.

Intensity

When it comes to intensity, a reduction during a taper has shown to lead to decreases in both aerobic and anaerobic performance measures. In several studies, intensity reductions ranging from 30 to 60% decreased aerobic and anaerobic performance by 20 to 30% as well as decrements in VO2max values. One basic explanation for this is that reducing intensity violates the rule of specificity in periodized training. Movement patterns and intensities should closely mimic the demands of competition as an athlete gets closer to competition. Reducing the weight on the bar for a powerlifter or straying too far away from race-pace for a runner does not adequately prepare them for competition. There may be situations where an intensity reduction is required (perhaps a mis-timed overreaching phase, or the athlete is too fatigue and sore to perform at the given intensity with quality movement), in these cases, keep intensity reductions on the low end (<30%).

In contrast, a maintenance or small increase in training intensity has been shown to be beneficial for performance. In power athletes, leg press 1RM, squat jump as well as track and field performance all increased when intensity of training was maintained up to the testing day or performance date. Elite rugby players also showed similar improvements in their jumping performance and their ability to generate force when intensity was slightly increased during a taper. 

Since the literature recommends that frequency and intensity be maintained or slightly increased during a taper, the most practical solution then is to reduce training load is to reduce training volume.
 

Volume

In endurance training, reducing volume can be achieved by reducing the total time spent in the target heart rate or power output zone, or reducing the total distance covered during training. Reducing the time-in-zone volume is more accurate compared to reducing total distance as it considers the intensity of which training is carried out.

In resistance training, reducing volume during a taper is achieved via reducing the number of reps or sets performed at any given intensity. Murach & Bagley (2015) state that for both endurance and power sports, reductions in training volumes ranging from 30% to 70% over the span of 2 or 3 weeks improves sport performance.

I know what you're thinking... "30% to 70%!? that's a huge range, how is that practical?"
 

---

So... How much & how fast?

The magnitude and duration of the volume reduction is dependent on several factors:

• The experience of the athlete (recreational vs. sub-elite vs. elite)

• Length of the their training cycle

• Initial training volume load

• Previous experiences with tapering and peaking

• Introduction of new recovery modalities during the taper or peak

It's suggested that if several weeks of moderate training is performed, a more conservative reduction in volume (30-50%) over the span of 7 to 10 days should be carried out. For hard training cycles that last several months, anywhere from 60-90% reductions in volume should be carried out over 10-28 days. The higher degree of accumulated fatigue, the larger reduction of training volume is needed to see performance gains at the end of the taper. This is where the readiness monitor plays a role in conjunction with monitoring training loads and intensity. Performance is just as much how the athlete feels the week of the competition, as it is how they're supposed to feel on paper.

---

Types of tapers

Taking into account the magnitude and duration of the taper, there are 3 tapering formats that have been reviewed in the literature.

Step taper is a complete and immediate decrease in training volume on the first day of the taper and is maintained throughout the whole duration.

Linear taper is defined as a progressive decrease in volume over the span of the taper duration, often seen in fixed increments. For example, decreasing volume by 5% or 10% every training session until the planned % reduction is reached.

Exponential taper involves reducing volume in a nonlinear fashion and can be defined as having a fast or slow decay rate. A fast decay rate for example, may mean reducing training volume by half every 2 days, while a slow decay rate may mean reducing training volume by half every 5 days. The literature proposes that for tapers that are short in duration, volume decreases should come by the way of step tapering or fast decay times, while athletes and coaches that possess more time to taper should experiment with more progressive reductions in volume with slow to moderate decay times.

Taken from Runsmartonline.com

Taken from Fellrnr.com

---

Tapering Benefits

How much of an improvement in performance can we expect from tapering volume and/or other training variables?

Obviously, this depends on the sport and the physical attributes related to the sporting event.

Reductions in training volume show benefits across the board for many different athletic events and populations. Below is a graph taken from Murach & Bagley (2015), outlining the performance benefits as it pertains to swimming, biking, running, rowing and throwing events.

Indirect Performance Measures

Tapering results in increased recovery and reduced stress, which can also facilitate more positive mood states and reducing performance anxiety, rate of perceived exertion and increased vigor and confidence. For all athletes, improvements in hormonal, psychological and sleep-related factors also contribute to increasing performance. 

Specifically for endurance and mixed-type athletes, glycogen storage plays a big role in performance. With a taper and reduction in training volume, liver and muscle glycogen stores are able to replenish to their maximum levels with an accompanying decrease in muscular fatigue. Contrastingly, glycolytic and aerobic enzymes seem to be less affected by tapering. Increases in muscular power has also been seen in endurance athletes. During a taper, the type II muscle fibers are able to recovery and hypertrophy at a faster rate than type I fibers, and has thought to be the main contributor of muscular power increases.

For strength and power athletes, the performance increases can be attributed to a decrease in muscular fatigue. When volume is decreased, markers of muscle damage also progressively decrease, resulting in lower instances of muscle soreness. 

For mixed athletes, the specific mechanisms are unclear and depend on the nature of the sport, but the taper benefits most likely come from a mixture of both endurance and power-based qualities. An analysis of the sport, and the athlete's position should be taken into account when planning a taper.
 

Direct Performance Increases

Endurance athletes can expect a 1-9% increase in VO2max, up to an 8% increase in running economy and up to a 15% increase in red blood cell count. Regardless of the distance of the event, it is reasonable to suggest that endurance athletes will see a direct 2-3% improvement in their sporting performance. 

In strength and power athletes, 2-3% increases in bench press and squat strength have been seen, as well as up to 20% increase in neuromuscular function and strength (the higher end being seen in less experienced athletes).

That about wraps about this series. I highly recommend reading my 5-part periodization article series, which you can find below.

References

Bosquet, Laurent, Jonathan Montpetit, Denis Arvisais, and I??igo Mujika. "Effects of Tapering on Performance." Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 39, no. 8 (2007): 1358-365.

Lacey, James De, Matt Brughelli, Michael Mcguigan, Keir Hansen, Pierre Samozino, and Jean-Benoit Morin. "The Effects of Tapering on Power-Force-Velocity Profiling and Jump Performance in Professional Rugby League Players." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 28, no. 12 (2014): 3567-570.

Mujika, I., A. Goya, E. Ruiz, A. Grijalba, J. Santisteban, and S. Padilla. "Physiological and Performance Responses to a 6-Day Taper in Middle-Distance Runners: Influence of Training Frequency." International Journal of Sports Medicine Int J Sports Med 23, no. 5 (2002): 367-73.

Murach, Kevin, and James Bagley. "Less Is More: The Physiological Basis for Tapering in Endurance, Strength, and Power Athletes." Sports 3, no. 3 (2015): 209-18.

Trinity, Joel D., Matthew D. Pahnke, Edwin C. Reese, and Edward F. Coyle. "Maximal Mechanical Power during a Taper in Elite Swimmers." Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 38, no. 9 (2006): 1643-649.

Wilson, Jacob M., and Gabriel J. Wilson. "A Practical Approach to the Taper." Strength and Conditioning Journal 30, no. 2 (2008): 10-17.

Zaras, Nikolaos D., Angeliki-Nikoletta E. Stasinaki, Argyro A. Krase, Spyridon K. Methenitis, Giorgos P. Karampatsos, Giorgos V. Georgiadis, Konstantinos M. Spengos, and Gerasimos D. Terzis. "Effects of Tapering With Light vs. Heavy Loads on Track and Field Throwing Performance." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 28, no. 12 (2014): 3484-495.

Periodization 301: Review Of Periodization Models

Periodization, the systematic planning of exercise and athletic training. It is one of the cornerstones of high level sports and physical performance and without it, training has no context and no direction.

This series will cover the big picture as well as dive into the small nuances of what makes periodization such an important topic to learn for any aspiring strength & conditioning coach or high performance trainer. 

This fourth part will cover and review various periodization models and their defining characteristics. 

Read Part 101: Introduction
Read Part 201: Training Variation
Read Part 202: Training Effect & Phases
Read Part 301: Review of Periodization Models
Read Part 401: The Complexities and Problems of Periodization Theory

---

Traditional Periodization

Popularized by sport scientists such as Matveyev and Tudor Bompa, traditional periodization (TP) was one of the first models of periodization created. TP is characterized by the concurrent development of technical, cardiovascular and strength-related abilities, whereby the initial phase is high-volume and low-intensity in nature, progressing towards a low-volume and high-intensity training protocol.  

TP is often referred to as "linear periodization" because of its linear increase in intensity and linear decrease in volume over the training macrocycle. However, this name may be inappropriate when viewed on the mesocycle level, as TP programs still have undulating and wave-like characteristics. Dr. Michael Stone, a world-renowned sports physiologist also believes that TP is confused with the term "linear" because volume is sometimes erroneously calculated using the number of repetitions and sets. In order to properly calculate and monitor training stress, volume load with the consideration intensity must be used. While the set-rep scheme can remain the same, the intensity can fluctuate and change.

For example: 3 sets of 5 reps @ 70% of 1RM is vastly different from 3 sets of 5 reps @ 85% of 1RM in terms of motor unit recruitment and training stress. This common strategy in non-traditional periodization models where "heavy" and "light" days can be used, while the set-rep scheme remains the same. Volume load variation and undulation should define the periodization model and type, NOT the set-rep scheme alone. 

Even "non-linear" or non-traditional periodization models possess linear characteristics when viewed on the macrocyclic-scale, progressing from a state of high-volume low-intensity training, to lower-volume higher-intensity training. However, the undulations of volume and intensity occur more frequently on the mesocycle-level, perhaps week to week, or even day to day (daily undulating periodization). Due to all these factors, the term traditional periodization is better suited. The figure below shows the manipulation of volume and intensity over several phases of a traditionally periodized training program. 

Taken from NSCA Seminar by Nick Winkleman (Athlete Profiling: Choosing a Periodization System to Maximize Individual Performance." Proceedings of NSCA 2012 National Conference, Providence, Rhode Island.

Here is an example of a 12-week TP resistance training program:
Mesocycle 1 - Weeks 1-4: 5 sets of 10 reps @ 65-70% 1RM
Mesocycle 2 - Weeks 5-8: 4 sets of 6 reps @ 75-80% 1RM
Mesocycle 3 - Weeks 9-12: 3 sets of 4 reps @ 85-90% 1RM

In this example, the volume load is decreasing from each mesocycle, while the average intensity is increasing. The main characteristic of TP is that the variation of volume and intensity happen between mesocycles, with little variation occurring within each mesocycle. This goes in line with the concurrent development of physical attributes, where Tudor Bompa believes some traits are best developed together to avoid the interference effect. For example, hypertrophy-based resistance training will be paired with aerobic system development as they both improve under high-volume training. While strength and power training will be paired with anaerobic energy system development and explosive strength and power will be developed simultaneously with alactic and specific endurance work.

TP is more beneficial for novice trainees and lifters as intensity is increased at a slow and gradual pace (from one mesocycle to another), allowing for an un-rushed acquisition of structural and technical changes such as mitochondrial biogenesis and muscle hypertrophy to occur. As discussed previously in Part 201, the development of these abilities follow a sequential order, where hypertrophy and aerobic-based qualities are developed before power, anaerobic and alactic qualities. TP is an excellent model for novice trainees that have not been accustomed to high training volumes and intensities, and can prepare them for future workloads and perhaps other periodization models. 

Defining Characteristics Of A Traditional Periodization Model:

• A macrocycle starts off with high-volume, low-intensity training

• A macrocycle ends off with low-volume, high-intensity training

• Physical attributes are all developed simultaenously

• Variations and undulations in volume and intensity occur from MESOCYCLE to MESOCYCLE.

What Traditional Periodization IS NOT:

• Not to be confused with "linear" increases in intensity from week to week.
  Example:
  5x5 @ 135lbs
  5x5 @ 145lbs
  5x5 @ 155lbs...
  This is a form a progression and is not a defining characteristic of the traditional periodization model.

Limitations of traditional periodization

While TP may be beneficial for novice trainees due to its concurrent development of physical abilities, it may be sub-optimal for intermediate or advanced athletes across a wide range of sports and performance settings. Many other factors also contribute to the need for a revision of the TP model of training, such as:

• Need for contuinual progress and improved performance

• Need for training stressor management in team sports

• Sports that have multiple competitions or a longer competitive season

One major limitation of the TP model is that TP is optimized for climatic sports, sports that require only several performance or one performance over a short-time span. TP does not take into consideration  seasonal sports or team sports that usually possess a longer competition period. An aggressive taper in the pre-season or pre-competition phase of training prepares athletes well for the beginning of the competitive season, however can be detrimental in keeping consistent performance measures over the span of the season.

TP-based programs are also hard to implement with large groups of athletes that participate in regular sport practice, competition and travelling. Seasonal team sport athletes need to maintain a base level of physical fitness during the long in-season in order to prevent detraining effects, therefore the planning of physical training must be altered during the competition period and the pre-competition or preparatory period. Since there is little to no variation in volume and intensity between microcycles/within the mesocycles, using a TP model in seasonal or team sports can be problematic. Athletes are essentially "stuck" with a specific volume and intensity scheme in any given mesocycle, therefore TP is often suggested to be inflexible for scenarios in which athletes need lower or higher intensities of work.

For example, we'll compared soccer player A and soccer player B on the same team.

Soccer player A plays on the starting line up and gets a lot of playing time. 
Soccer player B is relatively new and doesn't get a lot of playing time.

These 2 athletes will need different strength and conditioning maintenance programs in between games and in the competition season because they have uneven playing times, and therefore stress their bodies different. The TP-model doesn't allow soccer player B to jump into more high intensity lifting and endurance sessions that are needed for him to maintain his fitness attributes if they are still at the beginning of a "higher volume" phase. There is a need for different periodization methods depending on the sport, and the position of each player on the team. In team-based sports whose competition season lasts 20-35 weeks, a TP model of training has shown to lead to reductions in maximal strength, muscle mass, maximal speed, as well as the ability to recover between matches (Citation 1, 2). 

Even in individual sports, the increase in financial motivation and total number of competitions a year (play more games/compete in more matches = more money) calls for the revision of the TP model in order to produce more consistent results year round. The slow, monthly-undulatory nature of TP cannot achieve this.

---

Non-Traditional Periodization

Much like how TP is mistakenly named linear periodization, non-traditional periodization is often called undulating periodization and misguidedly named non-linear. Non-traditional periodization should technically encompass all the variations and revisions of the original TP.

Firstly, the name "non-linear" is misguided because programs can be viewed as linear or non-linear depending on the size of the scoped used to view the training program. If you step back and look at the big picture, most programs will improve performance over time. If we draw a line of best fit, does this mean every program is "linear"? Perhaps.

Secondly, all types of periodized programs are also undulatory in nature, the degree or time-scale of which undulation occurs is what defines the different models of periodization and is dependent on the type of sport, athlete as well as the time frame given to prepare. 

For the sake of consistency, non-traditional periodization (NTP) will refer to any of the 4 specific subcategories: reverse periodization (RP), weekly undulating periodization (WUP), daily undulating periodization (DUP) and block periodization (BP). 

---

Reverse Periodization

Reverse periodization (RP) is a model offered by Ian King, an Australian strength & conditioning coach, who characterized RP as initial phases of low-volume, high-intensity training, moving onto higher volume, lower-intensity training as a competition nears. This is essentially a "reverse" of the TP model. 

Since training variables in a periodized program are developed in a general to specific order, using a RP model-based program would be most suitable for long aerobic endurance sports like road cycling and running, which have competition demands that are high-volume and lower-intensity in nature. The TP model also addresses the general to specific continuum, but mainly for strength and power based sports.

Figure 2 and Figure 3 outlines the difference between TP and RP in terms of preparing for an endurance event (taken from "Base Endurance: Move Forwards with Reverse Periodisation").

Defining Characteristics Of A REVERSE Periodization Model:

• A macrocycle starts off with low-volume and high-intensity training

• A macrocycle ends off with high-volume and low-intensity training

Limitations of Reverse Periodization

The RP model shares many of the same drawbacks as the traditional model, notably, its inflexibility for team sport athletes and non-climatic sports.

An obvious limitation to reverse periodization is that it cannot be applied to power and strength sports, where competitions are high-intensity in nature. Since it is known that volume load is a larger contributor to fatigue than intensity, strength and power-based sport performance will suffer if an athlete heads into competition in a fatigued state. Even in the case where fatigue is strategically-controlled, reducing the intensity over the training cycle will hinder the expression of strength and power and violates the principle of specificity.

In addition, RP does not take into consideration residual training effects. Research has shown that high-intensity resistance training can improve time trial performance via improvements in maximal strength and RFD in elite cyclists - one reason to keep some high-intensity sessions when close to an endurance sport competition. High-intensity training adaptations detrain at a faster rate than cumulative low-intensity training adaptations, therefore if high-intensity training is not performed as competition gets closer, performance in endurance athletes that require intermittent bursts of high-intensity may suffer.

Research comparing RP with other forms of periodization showed that although RP was less effective for strength and hypertrophy compared to TP, RP was more beneficial than TP and daily undulating periodization for increasing muscular endurance (study 1, study 2). RP may be a viable strategy for endurance-based sports but has many pitfalls when applied to strength or power-based sports.

---

Undulating periodization

Undulating periodization, specifically daily (DUP) and weekly (WUP) undulating periodization are models that can be characterized by a greater frequency of variation in volume and intensity, achieved on the daily and weekly level. In comparison to TP, the greater variation of training is suggested to be more optimal for experienced athletes and team sports athletes.

DUP consists of day to day variations in volume and intensity. Below is an example of a endurance-based training and a resistance-based training set up.

DUP Configuration of 1 week in a 4-Week Mesocycle (Endurance Training)

• Monday: Low Intensity Steady State

• Wednesday: Lactate Threshold Training

• Friday: High-intensity Intervals

DUP Configuration of 1 week in a 4-Week Mesocycle (Resistance Training)

• Monday: 5x8 @ 70% 1RM

• Wednesday: 4x4 @ 85% 1RM

• Friday: 3x1 @ 95% 1RM

WUP on the other hand, consists of week to week variations in volume and intensity.

WUP Configuration of a 4-Week Mesocycle (Endurance Training)

• 1st Week: Low Intensity Steady State

• 2nd Week: Lactate Threshold Training

• 3rd Week: High-Intensity Intervals

• 4th Week: Unloading/Deload Week

WUP Configuration of a 4-Week Mesocycle (Resistance Training)

• 1st Week: 5x8 @ 70% 1RM

• 2nd Week: 4x4 @ 85% 1RM

• 3rd Week: 3x1 @ 95% 1RM

• 4th Week: Unloading/Deload Week

A popular example of a DUP-based program would be the Westside Barbell Method, while an example of a WUP-based program would be Wendler's 531 program.

Undulating periodization-based programs have become increasing popular across all sports because of its fatigue management and within-mesocycle variations. Coaches have found that volume and intensity can undulate from day to day or week to week, while still achieving the performance and physical attribute improvements comparable to more traditionally based training programs. This flexibility is particularly evident for in-season or athletes that are in their competition-season.

If a team coach requires a hard sport practice the day of a maximal strength training session, the maximal strength session can be pushed back in replacement of a workout targeting local muscle endurance or recovery when using a DUP model of training. DUP programs are also able to stimulate different energy systems and motor units all within the same week. Being able to stimulate both low-intensity and high-intensity adaptations within the same week has important implications for retaining physical performance during long in-season competition periods, a goal TP cannot achieve.

Another example: if a particular sport requires athletes to perform anaerobic work during playing time, but not so much aerobic throughout the in-season, the flexibility of DUP and WUP allows the inclusion of recovery and light aerobic sessions to retain and maintain a base level of aerobic conditioning without being chained to the confines of a TP-based training model where training intensity is based on the mesocycle goal.

The use of heavy and light days in a training week is also considered a form of DUP and can help manage fatigue more efficiently. As Nick Winkleman says: "DUP is great for maintenance, it allows for exposure but not depletion of energy or accumulation of fatigue".

The figures below shows the manipulation of volume and intensity over several phases of a DUP/WUP-based training program and examples of the use of alternating heavy and light days within a training week.

3x/Week Training Frequency.

4x/Week Training Frequency

Defining Characteristics Of An undulating Periodization Model:

• Undulations of volume and intensity occur on a week-to-week or day-to-day scale

Looking at some Research

DUP's flexibility can also be utilized in scenarios where the training environment is unplanned or unpredictable. A study by Peterson et al (2008) observed the effects of DUP versus TP on experienced, trained firefighters, whose job is usually unplanned and stressful in nature. DUP was able to accommodate for these factors by rotating endurance-days, strength-days and power-days. These different pathways were stimulated in a way where no one system was overly fatigued while progress could still be made. At the end of the 12-week intervention, the DUP group saw greater improvements in strength, power and firefighter-specific performance measures.

---

Block periodization

Block periodization (BP) originally called the Coupled Successive System by Yuri Verkoshansky, was developed and popularized by figures such as Verkoshansky himself, Anatoliy Bondarchuk and Vladimir Issurin. BP is considered an advanced periodization-model directed towards advanced, elite-level athletes. The basis behind BP is that elite-level athletes who are reaching the functional limits of their physical performance require highly concentrated training loads in order to further increase performance. In BP, a concentrated high-volume load "block" of training is directed towards a select group of physical capabilities, where these adaptations can be realized in the subsequent low-volume block.

BP heavily involves the concepts of cumulative and residual effects and deeply emphasizes sequential development of abilities. This is suitable for athlete already possess a solid training base and are able to handle several microcycles of very high-volume concentrated training. Although this type of training provides an optimal amount of saturation on the physical abilities that are selected, it comes at the expense of other motor abilities that are pushed to the side. For example, in a block dedicated to power training, aerobic qualities and muscular endurance might be comprised, but the BP model accounts for this by including a minimal amount of work to at least maintain these qualities.

Terms like "accumulation", "transmutation" and "realiziation" are also used in BP to describe the sequential development of phases. The accumulation phase focuses on basic abilities such as aerobic endurance and hypertrophy, the transmutation phase focuses on sport-specific abilities, while the realization phase focuses on restoration and tapering. As one can see, there can be parallels drawn between BP-based and TP-based periodization models. The figure below shows the compatibility of different motor abilities based on the dominant motor ability trained during a block - proposed by Vladmir Issurin. 

Defining Characteristics Of A block Periodization Model:

• The use of concentrated blocks of training loads

• Deep emphasis on cumulative and residual training effects

Looking at Some Resesarch

Elite endurance athletes spend the majority of their training time utilizing low-intensity training, with small bouts of high-intensity training to peak for a competition. However, the specific organiziation of these 2 training zones and methods are still unclear. Research by García-Pallarés et al (2010) found that a BP model improved performance more than a TP model in elite level kayakers despite the BP program being 10 weeks shorter. Taking a look at the details of the study design, it should be noted that the BP program included a higher percentage of high-intensity training, therefore making it hard to conclude whether the benefits came from superior distribution of the training load, or the increased concentration of high-intensity training. When comparing different periodization models and different distribution of training, intensity and volume must be equated and accounted for.

In another study, Rønnestad et al (2012) looked at the effects of TP and BP on cycling performance in well-trained cyclist. The intervention lasted 4 weeks, while the volume and intensity of training were similarly matched between the TP and BP group. The TP group performed 2 high-intensity training sessions interspersed by high-volume, low-intensity aerobic training every week. The BP group performed a full week of high-intensity training consisting of 5 training sessions, followed by 1 high-intensity training session interspersed with low-intensity aerobic training for the subsequent 3 weeks. The results of this study showed the BP group improved their VO2max values, peak power output and power output at 2mmol/L blood lactate, while no changes occurred in the TP-based group.

Unlike the García-Pallarés et al (2010) study, the 2 groups in this study performed an identical number of high-intensity sessions, therefore the performance increase was most likely due to superior organization of training and not from an increased concentration of high-intensity sessions. Aside from these improvements however, lactate threshold and cycling economy remained unchanged in both groups, as expected by the researches due to the brief nature of the 4-week intervention. From this study, we see that a high concentration of training load allowed for a stronger training stimulus needed to improve performance variables in elite athletes. Whether that increase in VO2max has an influence on actual endurance race performance, is another question.

While not all programs will look exactly the same as the models above, many periodized programs share many of the characteristics of at least one of the models above. You'd even be surprised that some training programs deemed as "non-periodized" are infact, periodized to a degree.

---

Periodized vs. Non-periodized programs

A large majority of the research literature state that periodized training programs are effective across many measures of strength, power and motor performance for both men and women of varying training age and levels compared to non-periodized programs (Citations #1, #2). This should not come as a surprise as using kinesiology and sport science-based training methods allows coaches to view training adaptations in a more predictable course, and therefore they are able to adjust the subsequent training cycle to consolidate weaknesses or errors from the previous cycle. This is the overarching theme in sports planning and exercise performance. 

In cases where periodized training showed no benefits compared to non-periodized training, often, the subjects had a low level of initial fitness and/or the length of the intervention was not long enough. An example of this is a study on the effects of volume and intensity periodization on strength in novice trainees. When a "non-periodized" program was volume matched with a traditional and non-traditional periodization model, strength gains on the squat and bench press were similar between groups. Baker et al (1994) concluded that over short training cycles, non-periodized strength training programs result in the same gains a periodized programs. 

So what's the problem with short programs or study lengths?

Periodization models develop physical attributes in sequences and adaptations to training take time. Too short of an intervention does not allow this sequential development to happen. Future training cycles should be built upon using previous ones. It seems the benefits from a periodized program are accentuated when it is used in a longer time frame. When Stone et al (1999) analyzed 15 periodization studies, it was found that 13 studies showed improved results from a periodized program over a non-periodized program.

Rethink the term "non-periodized"

All programs, are infact, periodized to a certain degree. By now, you should know periodization simply means the structuring of training cycles. If there is no structure, there is no program. While some people may consider this semantics, it really isn't. A training program that offers random variations in training load and training variables is still a periodized program (a poorly periodized one). It can be even argued that variation and novelty itself is the key to performance increases, rather than strategically planning. 

Although some coaches might claim certain models of periodization are the "best" or are superior compared to other models, it is foolish to think that a one set of rules or a rigid system can accomodate the performance demands of athletes from different ages, sports and environmental constraints. 

Next time, we'll take a look at the application of these models and dive into why they're called "models" and not programs. We will also discuss the problems and limitations of periodization and what to do moving forwards.

5-Part Periodization Series Links:
Read Part 101: Introduction
Read Part 201: Training Variation
Read Part 202: Training Effect & Phases
Read Part 301: Review of Periodization Models
Read Part 401: The Complexities and Problems of Periodization Theory